Agenda and minutes

1.         This meeting is to be webcast;

2.         Members are reminded of the need to activate their microphones before speaking; and

3.         the Chairman will read the following announcement:

“I would like to remind everyone present that this meeting will be filmed live for subsequent uploading to the Internet and will be capable of repeated viewing.

If you are seated in the public seating area it is possible that the recording cameras will capture your image and this will result in the possibility that your image will become part of the broadcast although Officers will try and avoid this.

This may infringe your human and data protection rights and if you have any concerns about this you should speak to the Webcasting Officer.”

The Chairman made a short address to remind all present that the meeting would be broadcast on the Internet, and that the Council had adopted a protocol for the webcasting of its meetings.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Sub-Committee.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the last meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 10 April 2013 be agreed.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) To declare interests in any item on this agenda.

There were no declarations of interest made pursuant to the Member’s Code of Conduct.

Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs 6 and 25 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution requires that the permission of the Chairman be obtained, after prior notice to the Chief Executive, before urgent business not specified in the agenda (including a supplementary agenda of which the statutory period of notice has been given) may be transacted.

In accordance with Operational Standing Order 6 (non-executive bodies), any item raised by a non-member shall require the support of a member of the Committee concerned and the Chairman of that Committee.  Two weeks' notice of non-urgent items is required.

There was no other business for consideration.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development)  To consider planning applications as set out in the attached schedule

Background Papers:  (i)  Applications for determination – applications listed on the schedule, letters of representation received regarding the applications which are summarised on the schedule.  (ii)  Enforcement of Planning Control – the reports of officers inspecting the properties listed on the schedule in respect of which consideration is to be given to the enforcement of planning control.

The Sub-Committee considered a schedule of applications for planning permission.

            RESOLVED:

            That the planning applications numbered 1 – 17 be determined as set out in the attached schedule to these minutes.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) To consider the attached report.

The Sub-Committee received a report regarding Confirmation of Tree Preservation Order TPO/EPF/21/12 Dolphin Court, High Road, Chigwell.

TPO/EPF/21/12 protected 7 trees, individually specified, on the northern and western boundaries of Dolphin Court with High Road and Hainault Road, Chigwell. The tree of concern to the objector was T1 Ash situated close to the boundary with 1 Hainault Road.

The TPO was made at the request of some of the residents of Dolphin Court as a result of a disagreement about the felling of one of the trees in particular. Given the location, and in particular the visual importance of the particular trees, a selective order was made on those trees of most public value.

Objection

The objection was on the basis that:

(1)        Ash trees were not generally attractive trees and only warranted a TPO in special circumstances, which in this instance, did not exist.

(2)        The tree was a potential threat to foundations and the TPO may prevent proper pruning or crown reduction. This would increase worry and cause difficulty with insurance, as a pensioner and widow, this was a concern to the objector.

(3)        The unfettered growth of the tree would cause an increase in maintenance through leaves in the gutters and on the driveway, as well as unnecessary and undesirable shading and infringe the objector’s views.

(4)        Additionally the objector felt that TPOs had “got out of hand” in the district. She supported tree protection in principle but felt that TPOs should be made only where trees were of special importance which she felt here was not the case. She felt that the reason for the number of TPOs was that the relevant officers wished to have bigger departments and more responsibility, as a result they made no distinction between trees which were important to the environment and those which were not.

The Principal Landscape Officer advised that he was unsure if the objector had been notified that this application was being put before this sub-committee. He suggested that this item should be deferred to a future sub-committee meeting to allow officers to check that the objector had been notified.

RESOLVED:

That Confirmation of Tree Preservation Order TPO/EPF/21/12 at Dolphin Court, High Road, Chigwell be deferred to a future meeting of the sub-committee to allow officers time to check that the objector has been notified of the application being put before the sub-committee.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) Schedules of planning applications determined by the Head of Planning and Economic Development under delegated powers since the last meeting of a Plans Subcommittee may be inspected in the Members Room or at the Planning and Economic Development Information Desk at the Civic Offices, Epping.

The Sub-Committee noted that schedules of planning applications determined by the Director of Planning and Economic Development under delegated authority since the last meeting had been circulated and could be inspected at the Civic Offices.